Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Obligatory ride sharing, less living space, more facility sharing, less ownership of goods, no car, far less privacy.
This is what 2030 could look like if we win the war on climate change
31 Oct 2019
Ida Auken Member of Parliament, Parliament of Denmark (Folketinget)By 2030, your CO2 emissions will be greatly reduced. Meat on your dinner table will be a rare sight. Water and the air you breathe will be cleaner and nature will be in recovery. The money in your wallet will be spent on being with family and friends, not on buying goods. Saving the climate involves huge change, but it could make us much happier at the same time.
Right now, we are losing the fight against climate change – but what would winning look like? What is life like in a green world?
Here’s one version of a “CO-topia”:
You walk out of your front door in the morning into a green and liveable city, where concrete has dwindled and green facades and parks are spreading. If you choose to call a car, an algorithm will calculate the smartest route for the vehicle and pick up a few other people on the way.
Since the city council’s ban on private cars in the city, lots of new mobility services have arrived. It is cheaper for you not to own your own car, which, in turn, reduces congestion so you arrive at your destination more easily and quickly and don’t have to spend time looking for somewhere to park. You can also choose to travel by bike, scooter or public transit.
The air you breathe in the city is cleaner because there are far fewer cars on the streets and the rest are electric – all electricity is green in fact. There is less noise and much more space for parks and pedestrian streets since all the parking space became available. For lunch you can choose from dozens of exciting meals – most of them are plant-based, so you eat more healthily and are more environmentally friendly than when lunch meant choosing between five types of burger.
Single-use plastics are a distant memory. You still grab a to-go coffee, but it comes in a reusable cup that you turn in at the next coffee shop to get your deposit back. The same system applies to plastic bottles and other take-away containers. At home, all of your household appliances have been turned into service contracts. If your dishwasher is about to break down, it is no longer your problem. The service provider already knows about the problem and has sent someone to fix it. When the machine no longer works, the provider picks up the old machine and installs a new one.
People are trying out new types of living arrangements with more shared functions and spaces. This means that more people can afford to live in cities. More houses are built with wood, which makes them nicer to live in and much better for the climate than concrete buildings.
When you buy something, you buy something that lasts; you buy it because you really need it and want to take care of it. But because you buy far fewer things, you can actually afford products of better quality and design. “Refuse, reuse, reduce, recycle” is the new way of looking at products: if you don’t need it, you refuse; if you buy it, you will use it again and again; and in the end, you recycle it. All packaging is made from three types of plastic or other new materials, so recycling is easier these days.
Agriculture has changed dramatically, as the new plant-based alternatives to meat and dairy products have made it harder for traditional animal-based products to compete. Much of the land formerly used to produce animal feedstock has become available. As people in cities have started to value going into nature, tourism, hunting and angling now offer new types of income for people living in rural areas. Forests and nature are again spreading across the globe. People travel more in their region and by train, so air traffic has started to decline. Most airlines have switched to electrofuels, biofuels or electricity.
Best of all, because citizens have stopped buying so much stuff, they have more money to spend on other things. This new disposable income is spent on services: cleaning, gardening, help with laundry, healthy and easy meals to cook, entertainment, experiences and fabulous new restaurants. All of these things give the average modern person more options and more free time to spend with their friends and families, working out, learning new skills, playing sports or making art – you name it and there’s more time to do it.
If we consider what the future could be, picking up the mantle against climate change may not seem so bad after all.
License and Republishing
Source: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/10/what-happens-if-we-beat-climate-change/
World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with our Terms of Use.
Written by
Ida Auken, Member of Parliament, Parliament of Denmark (Folketinget)
The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.
Lots of wood and recycled materials used for construction, more shared facilities, lower cost of residency, less use of electricity, no private car ownership and less private ownership of goods.
What author Ida Auken is describing is a slum or tent city.
Here’s a hint for you Ida; most people don’t choose to live this way, of their own free will.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Mega-city one.
1984
“If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – forever.”
Yeah, the author left out some parts.
‘The police presence has increased such that uniforms are everywhere. A sign on each corner lists number to call to report anyone who fails to comply with the hundreds of rules also posted nearby. You must use a public phone since private phones have been banned. Average wait in the phone line is 20-30 minutes since not reporting something regularly is considered suspicious.
Two or three people you know inexplicably disappear each week, but no one mentions it. Reminders to “Smile” are also everywhere, and since a frown is punishable everyone who walks by has the same rigid grin and glances furtively from face to face or to the numerous “Happiness Mirrors” on every door…’
Suggest they pilot this approach in two US states. California and New York.
1. Ban all cars. Use Uber Rickshaw to get around.
2. All electricity to come from windmills and solar panels erected within the state. No outside sourcing of electricity.
3. Ban all meat.
4. Close all airports in those two states.
4. Five year minimum trial. At this time the population can tell us how happy they are.
Nice thought, but since such a huge percent of our fruits and vegatables come from California, I think consumers in the rest of the country would veto that idea.
I think most in the rest of country have had enough of California nuts, fruits and vegetables.
Hey Richard, you forgot to mention the California nuts
Notice I said ban cars. I did not say ban tractors, trucks, or trains.
True, but a “True Believer” wants to ban anything using fossile fuel.
Nope.
Plenty of cars in the Big Meg. The first prep Dredd arrests gets locked up on ‘Devil’s Island’ which is a prison in the middle of a major freeway which using the constant stream of cars going past to stop people escaping.
Mega-City One is a lot of things, but woke isn’t one of them
Who makes this rubbish up? The mass mount of job losses is mind blowing…..
More houses are built with wood 😐 Most airlines have switched to electrofuels, biofuels or electricity 😐 what fuel will create such a large amount of electricity?? Solar, wind? Unicorn tears?
As people in cities have started to value going into nature, tourism, “hunting” and angling now offer new types of income for people living in rural areas. Forests and nature are again spreading across the globe.
How will there be any tree’s if we are building everything from wood?? Hunting LOLOL Im sure the greens have something to say about that…
Yeah that hunting bit was funny. I can only imagine that is w/ a bow and arrow.
Nope. Slingshots and boomerangs.
Where does the rubber for the sling shot come from?
Only rocks and throwing sticks allowed. Once you kill a kangaroo you can make a sling.
Nope,rocks and clubs!
Banned . Cultural appropriation.
Steel will go away, plastics will go away, rubber will become far less resilient. All Wire insulation will vanish. Houses/Structures built of wood will deplete carbon sinks, be susceptible to fire destruction and wind damage, and window glass without polymer sheeting will be unsafe. Tornadoes, hurricanes, strong winds and Hail find doing damage to concrete practically impossible.
Airlines powered by electricity would require batteries the size of the cargo hold, eliminating the space for baggage and claiming the vast majority of overall gross vehicle weight resulting in either a far more limited potential travel distance or a decrease in passenger capacity causing an increase in ticket prices.
Hunting would likely increase out of necessity as it would become the only source for animal meat protein. Billions of hunters sourcing food WILL have an overall negative effect on the natural environment as species are hunted into extinction.
The city dwellers will be hunting their neighbors’ pets.
Or their neighbors.
“hunting” with Pentax no doubt. No one will be allowed to kill anything. Picking mushrooms will probably be as near to hunting as you are allowed to do.
“The money in your wallet will be spent on being with family and friends”
Even spending time with your family will be taxed because they all have carbon footprints and it’s your fault for having a family, you selfish bastard.
Why do all these “green ” utopias begin with the letters d-i-s ???
“Best of all, because citizens have stopped buying so much stuff, they have more money to spend on other things.”
Did they resurrect Yogi Berra for this winner?
Well, I for one will spend whatever money I save from not buying stuff…on other stuff.
(cue the venerable philosopher George Carlin)
“CO-topia”
Last time I looked CO is carbon monoxide, not so good for respiration .
Are they subliminally advocating gas chambers?
It seems the advocates of this strategy have missed the fundamental lesson from the original “3 Little Pigs”. (and probably many other lessons as well)
Since wooden housing is far less durable than stone, and only slightly better than grass or daub-and-wattle, why would you want one of these shanties when the “wolf” comes howling at your door?
Remember that they are the wolves!
Possibly, no such risk because the Intellectual Overlords will also be finely controlling the weather?
“More houses are built with wood.” Somebody tell the author quick that trees are too precious to use for building houses. /sarc
It’s time to knock this BS down. I have the power of one. Vote accordingly in 2020 #MAGA
THE GREEN REICH – October 31, 2019
by Drieu Godefridi
(Author)
Ban everything we can, eco-tax the rest: this could be the motto of the environmentalists in politics. If human CO2 is the problem, then Man must be restrained, controlled, suppressed in every one of his CO2-emitting activities: that is to say, in the totality of his actions.
Researching environmentalism from the root of its anti-humanist ethic to the staggering heights of its actual demands — banning cars, aircraft, meat, nuclear energy, rural life, the market economy, modern agriculture, in short, post-Industrial-Revolution modernity.
Drieu Godefridi shows that environmentalism defines a more radical ideology in its liberticidal, anti-economic and ultimately humanicidal claims than any totalitarian ideology yet seen.
“Dividing humanity by a factor of ten” is the environmentalist ideal. “It is the people who enslave themselves, who cut their own throats.”
Etienne de La Boétie, “Discourse on Voluntary Servitude” (1549). PhD (Sorbonne),
Drieu Godefridi has authored many books, on gender, the IPCC and environmentalism.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/2930650249
Allan,
Thanks, global liberalism is not for me. This nonsense went out the door with Obama, let’s hope we can keep it that way.
RonS – a minor point of terminology – these people often masquerade as Liberals or Socialists or Progressives. In fact, they are typically Marxist totalitarians, and we know how that went down.
Stalin, Hitler and Mao, and lesser tyrants like Pol Pot and other Tin Pots killed over 200 million souls in the 20th Century. It is inevitable that a murderous sociopath takes control when so much power is concentrated in one place.
Current-day Marxists say “This time it will be different.” It won’t.
Allan,
I appreciate your wisdom. I’m fairly new here and was looking over some of your work. Impressive. Some over this retired deplorables head, a work in progress.
Thanks,
“dividing humanity by a factor of 10.” They actually want more than that. When I did research for a paper in `95 I discovered that they want to reduce humanity by a factor of over 35-to 200 million, less than existed on the whole planet pre-Roman Empire.
Re population reduction: I’ve always wondered what the minimum population necessary for a technically advanced civilization actually is. I’ll bet it’s significantly higher than the population control folks advocate!
I do know for a fact that at the population level they want, they would have no phones, TV, Internet, social media, and even if they were at the top of the heap, they would have no clean water, sewer, air conditioning, ice, no fruits or vegetables out of season or grown more than about ten miles away, etc. etc. etc. Even peons in the US live better than kings and queens two hundred years ago when the world population first hit the billion mark. So my guess for our current tech level, it would be about three billion, minimum.
They never think that they themselves will be living that way, no, just the little people, not the elites like the author. They will be living the life of luxury, flying to exotic tropical vacations in private jets.
“They never think that they themselves will be living that way, no, just the little people, not the elites like the author. They will be living the life of luxury, flying to exotic tropical vacations in private jets.”
Ex-effing-xactly!
And they’ll have us under their thumbs, both with laws/regulations and 24/7/365 electronic monitoring of virtually everything we say/do/go/read. This way, the rich can enjoy their wealth because not only will they know who the ‘bad’ guys are (i’m sure private ownership of guns will be a thing of the past by then), we won’t be in their way at airports or on roads, and we’ll be tucked away like cattle in cities living in wooden skyscrapers while they enjoy their mansions in their rich enclaves out away from these COtopias where us maggots, who pay their monthly rent fees for the things we need, live
Hunger game, here we come!
Digging out my yellow vest and sharpening my pitchfork!
All this to “counter” ONE degree of natural variation since 1850. Have we gone barking MAD?
United Nation’s Agenda 21 Depopulation Initiative
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Agenda+21+depopulation+Initiative&view=detail&mid=7A77A0F30722BD48FDD37A77A0F30722BD48FDD3&FORM=VIRE
Don’t forget to search for tinfoil hats too, you’ll need them.
I have downloaded the agenda 21 document from the UN website. It’s 351 pages and it’s real.
Patrick,
Thanks for that link.
I used it to start a new thread here:
“Want to hear a rich genius talk blatant, anti science ignorance?”
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/42610/
For that speech, he deserves a 100% wealth tax.
Patrick
No matter how valid concerns about Agenda 21 may be…Do not ever link me to any website that has an Anti Vaccination and Pro Voodoo agenda…
And also spare me the absolute BS within to links that claim to have evidence that Michelle Obama is a Man…
Unless linking to The Onion or Babylon Bee.
Here’s another UN document I posted about yesterday in a cold thread, and should have posted here:
————-
I hope WUWT will run a refutation of this UN document. (Or has it done so already?):
Here’s a paragraph by a commenter, M. Clark, on the Seeking Alpha financial site, followed by quotes from the UN paper:
UN Climate Change News, 6 September 2018 – A major report released by the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate finds that many people are significantly under-estimating the benefits of cleaner, climate-smart growth. Bold climate action could deliver at least 26 trillion USD in economic benefits through to 2030, compared with business-as-usual.
—————
“Climate action and socio-economic progress are mutually supportive. Yet, despite some encouraging momentum, we are not making progress fast enough. Climate change is running faster than we are.”, said António Guterres during remarks at the launch of the report. https://unfccc.int/news/climate-smart-growth-could-deliver-26-trillion-usd-to-2030-finds-global-commission
Key ref: The 2018 Report of the Global Commission on the Economy and Climate
https://newclimateeconomy.report/2018/
extracts from summary: https://newclimateeconomy.report/2018/executive-summary/
“We are entering a new era of economic growth. This approach can deliver growth that is strong, sustainable, balanced, and inclusive. It is driven by the interaction between rapid technological innovation, sustainable infrastructure investment, and **** increased resource productivity ****.”
This is our ‘use it or lose it’ moment. Investing the US$90 trillion to build the right infrastructure now will deliver a new era of economic growth. […] Getting it wrong, on the other hand, will lock us into a high-polluting, low productivity, and deeply unequal future.
Smarter urban development: Better urban planning and strategic infrastructure investment, *** particularly the expansion of public and non-motorised transport networks ***, can overcome bottlenecks to economic growth – such as congestion and air pollution – for more liveable cities.
A circular industrial economy: From 1970 to 2010, annual global extraction of materials grew from almost 22 to 70 billion tonnes […] Today, 95% of plastic packaging material value—as much as US$120 billion annually—is lost after first use.13 Policies which encourage more circular, efficient use of materials (especially metals, petrochemicals and construction materials) could enhance global economic activity, as well as reduce waste and pollution.
and lastly
But, overall, we are still not making progress fast enough toward a new climate economy. The policy hand-brake is still on. Policy-makers are not taking sufficiently bold action to escape the legacy economic systems. [..] Fossil fuels as a share of final energy consumption remains stubbornly around 80% – roughly the same percentage as at the beginning of the 1990s. […] Mixed policy signals and hedging is slowing the momentum driving the new growth approach. It also triggers market uncertainty and increases stranded asset risk. […] The cost of hedging – taking action, but too slowly and with mixed signals to the market – is rising.
Some people are rich, some are poor. How unfair! Everybody should be poor.
Democratic Presidential Candidates, that includes you.
I read through that sunny little tale, and funny thing, the free will of people never actually came up. Huh.
This sounds like a communist utopia to me.
Hey Ida,
This may sound radical to you, but is any of this by free choice? You said the city council banned private ownership of cars, no freedom of food choices, no freedom of building materials for your home, etc. The coffee shop “owner” has to accept the cups from every other store, but who buys the new ones to replace worn out cups? What if some coffee shops are better at cleaning and sanitizing their reusable mugs?
If this Utopia is so grand as you envision, why not set up neighborhoods with these restrictions and see if there are people lining up for that style of living. If it truly is as freeing and wonderful as you believe, then it will organically spread throughout society.
I suspect you know the answer though. The description sounds very similar to the outward trappings of life in Orwell’s 1984, and that was created to his the horrors of the world as depicted.
The book 1984 and the movie Brazil were meant as warnings, not how-to guides. Especially in combination.
I loved Brazil; my wife thought it was weird. Glad to see someone else liked it.
I just read the plot to Brazil and it is strongly reminisicent of “1984”
1984 not a guide – that is funny.
Another Utopia book, much overlooked, is B. F. Skinner’s Walden II. Yes, that B. F. Skinner.
In Walden II, a professor form the university comes to a commune of sorts that a friend has gotten established nearby. Everything is idyllic and everyone is happy and laboring away at a modest amount of planned work.
The concept behind the happy village is this. Skinner builds upon his psychological insights about conditioning to realize that we are all a great sum of conditioning circumstances that have happened to us across our lives.
Skinner ponders: if we are a sum of our conditioning experiences, and the experiences are random, then what if we had a bunch of Intellectual Overlords design and present these experiences intentionally, in a purposeful planned way? Like a training curriculum for some job or skill, but our psychology and our desires in our social world.
So, the Walden II commune is developed according to this.
Skinner actually seems to believe it would be fine to engineer people’s psychology this way to create a utopia type society. Walden II is fiction, but Skinner has a companion book in which he scholarly and seriously presents this technology. That book is “Beyond Freedom and Dignity.”
The reason for the title is that he believes we need to look beyond concepts such as “freedom” and “dignity” in order to develop this utopia world. Hey, at least this pointy-headed intellectual was honest.
These books may be out there in free pdf or some easy to access form. i encourage you all to look into these.
I’ve often said ‘utopiad’ like this should be set-up on university campuses first to see how it flies – and crashes and burns. “Whatta’ ya mean I can’t buy a new iPhone?”
Or better still, “WHAT DO YOU MEAN NO INTERNET OR SOCIAL MEDIA?????” Well, if you can’t own an internet device, what do you expect?
This woman describes a world in constant recession [aka depression] as a positive. Where do jobs come from in that world? This is almost the definition of dystopia; and is anyone really happy? Maybe in Denmark this is what the good life can look like, but don’t bring it here.
The last time they got a chance to impose communism, it failed because the people could see how much better off people were in non-communist countries.
This time, they’re working hard to make people believe that having a decent standard of living a sin, so communism will look good in comparison. And to ensure that all countries are dragged down at the same time, so there’ll be nowhere better to compare your sh*thole commune to.
Darned if this does not explain a whole lot. Me out here in the suburbs totally unaware of how immoral I have been all my life, and in need of repentance.
This nightmare scenario is not going to win the masses over. It is hard to tell if it is real or satire.
Hey, put me down for loads of hunting and my increase in hobby activity. My hobby is racing V8 cars flat out as often as possible. I could be persuaded to switch to a less harsh hobby by going over to V12s.
Small question. What do we do with all the meat acquired from the hunting?
Ron, What sort of “meat” are you hunting with a V8 or V12?
If it’s the kind of “meat” I imagine, they are “catch and release”. But, hopefully that’s all you catch.
Roadkill?
What is stopping anyone living like this now if they wish? As for all the open space, won’t that be taken up by all the inefficient green energy generation and organic farming?
In other words the peasants will be dirt poor. And the elite will be a new aristocracy. Golly golly gosh I always wanted to be a serf in the thirteenth century!! That’s always been my life’s ambition! Maybe if we are really lucky we can even bring back the black plague to prune back the excess population.
By the way the thermometer in my back yard this morning was reading twenty degrees F. I live in Chicago. I don’t remember it ever being so cold so early.
Who here can imagine Elizabeth Warren, Bernie, Bill Gates, Bloomberg, Al Gore, Michael Mann, the Clintons….all living shoulder to shoulder w/ us lowly peasants?
NEVER HAPPEN!
‘What is good for thee is not suitable for ME!’
Barbee
BUT…BUT…BUT…
We shall all be trying out… New Living Arrangements… so Al Tobacco and Bernie Socialista and Bloomers will throw open their 3 houses and mansions and it will all be groovy and hippy and we can spend many hours playing with the herd of Unicorn Ponies as we have heaps of time.
‘Cos no one has yet been approved by The World Future Job Council to be gifted one of the 15% of jobs left in this economy.
This should be on every clear thinking exam everywhere in the world as an example of complete and utter Idiocy.
Are we certain this is not From The Onion or Babylon Bee.
They want us to live their dreams. I would rather live — or least strive to live — my own dreams. That’s what economic development is about — to obtain the resources to do just that.
Greta’s dreams would become the world’s nightmare. Or, as I am sure has been said before, one person’s dream is another’s nightmare
Hi Indur – nice to hear from you.
I used your 2010 work in this 2015 paper:
https://friendsofsciencecalgary.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/cold-weather-kills-macrae-daleo-4sept2015-final.pdf
Best, Allan
THE COST TO SOCIETY OF RADICAL ENVIRONMENTALISM
By Allan M.R. MacRae, B.A.Sc., M.Eng., July 4, 2019
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/04/the-cost-to-society-of-radical-environmentalism/
[There is a reason I published this article on July 4.]
It is a very interesting point of view.
Climatards have the weirdest fantasies.
The World Economic Forum meets at Davos, Switzerland where a burger costs $48.
President Trump gave Davos Man a little lesson in 2018 :
President Trump arrives in Davos :
BonBon
Is that Leo Di Caprio and Arnie on the way out to pick up a dozen burgers for their homies?
Silly Me..No Way!
They would use separate choppers of course.
Though Take In…delivered by Leo’s private jet is always an option.
If they can not stop fires in California now; how would they stop them when all the dwellings are made of wood. I remember reading about the great fires of Chicago, Baltimore, London and San Francisco (aftermath of an earthquake).
Well, Mrs. O’Leary wouldn’t be allowed to have a cow, so there’s that.
I really tried to read all the way to the end, but my brain explosion warning alarms went off at the part where people will have more money because everyone buys fewer things.
Do these numbnuts have any concept whatsoever about what money is? Hint – it represents a share in the total goods and services of the economy. Whether it’s gold, silver, fiat paper, or crypto, it is nothing more than a store of value. It’s a bit like having shares of a stock called The Economy. If the economy collapses, the share price collapses. In the Soviet bloc, lots of people had money, and not only that, but thanks to the wonders of a planned economy, everything had a low, “affordable” price. The only minor glitch was that the store shelves were empty.
With no goods to buy, what are we going to be doing with the excess money, buying tickets to performance art?
Without production of value, what is the source of income? Oh I forgot, under green socialism, everybody is distributed money from the source of money, the government, including those unwilling to work. We will pretend to work, and they will pretend to pay us.
Because that worked out so well in the Soviet Union.
Sounds like a cross between Hunger Games and Divergent.
It is going to be difficult for people to keep voting for it.
What makes you think that you would still have the right to vote if these kind of people ever get the reins of power?
Editorial correction:
“It is going to be difficult for people to keep voting”
Fixed it for you. Opposition to socialism is treason. Since they speak in the name of the “People” elections are unnecessary.
WW and Mark
Only enemies of The Fragile Environment demand the UNSUSTAINABLE concept of Voting For All Adults.
Crowding on roads is determined by the number of journeys made, not by the number cars owned (or not owned). Only if taxis are shared by people with different destinations the number of vehicles on the road is decreased. Having traveled about a bit I associate that concept with third-world countries.
It has never been shown that a meat free diet is more healthy. Quite the contrary. Diabetes is a scourge affecting many people on the subcontinent, who are predominantly vegetarians. Conversely, innuit people used to live quite well on a vegitable-free diet of purely animal meats and fats. The fact that west Europeans are generally tall people is widely attributed to a diet rich in animal products.
The diabetes epidemic would end overnight with a healthy raw-vegan diet that cuts out all processed carbohydrates from pasta, potatoes, rice, bread, sweet pastries and the like. Eat carrot sticks, lettuce and apples for a locally sourced, eco-friendly diet. It will also limit your children’s growth so the next generation can live in smaller homes, need less calories overall and exhale less CO2.
“ locally sourced ”
That means elk and deer where we live. Hay grows well and while
we do not eat grass, cattle do.
Carrots don’t do well in the rocks. For half the year,
they are brought from Chile, a few thousand miles away.
You will find that heating a home in winter is much too energy-expensive up north, so you will be convinced to move south.
“You will find that heating a home in winter is much too energy-expensive up north”
Not if one has a good rocket stove (see http://theselfsufficientliving.com/diy-rocket-stove-plans-to-cook-food-or-heat-small-spaces/) and a nearby timber source.
You forgot the /sarc
Right?
“The diet of Benin is based on starchy roots (cassava, yams) and cereals. Large variations are observed between the north and the south of the country. In the south, the diet is mostly based on maize and fish, while in the north, traditional cereals (millet in particular) still have an important role and meat/milk products are more available. Rice is becoming increasingly important in urban areas, but also in rural areas.
The per capita supply of starchy roots is very high; its share in the dietary energy supply has decreased slightly over the last four decades to the advantage of cereals.”
Benin also has the lowest diabetis rate in the world (per 2017 data).
And the Eskimos in Greenland rarely put anything but seal in their moth. They have adapted to the environment to a degree where even their blood ores and wanes are close together to lower the average temperature in limbs, similar to the birds. However, they still feel nice and warm in bed 🙂
There was an article here on WUWT I thing, where a psychologist ex plaint that mainly only meat supply the chemicals needed to grow brain.
Ed it isn’t about a healthy-diet…meat is a new boogeyman/bogeyman for the climate change crusaders. Uses more resources and generates cow farts.
Quote: “..For lunch you can choose from dozens of exciting meals – most of them are plant-based, so you eat more healthily…”
That is B.S., according to the Healthline article linked below.
https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/animal-vs-plant-protein#section2
Allow me to quote from the linked article:
“..For optimal health, your body needs all the essential amino acids in the right ratios.
Animal protein sources, such as meat, fish, poultry, eggs and dairy, are similar to the protein found in your body.
These are considered to be complete sources of protein because they contain all of the essential amino acids that your body needs to function effectively.
On the contrary, plant protein sources, such as beans, lentils and nuts are considered to be incomplete, as they lack one or more of the essential amino acids that your body needs ..”
…..
…..
…..
“Bottom Line:
All proteins are made up of amino acids, although the amount and type of each amino acid varies based on the protein source…”
Ms. Auken does not appear to have any background in dietary science. She is likely merely parroting what she heard from others in the environmental/climate scare movement. Not the sharpest tool in the shed.
The good news is we don’t have to give up meat.
How will they keep all that extra green space trimmed? Certainly not with lawnmowers. We’ll keep all that public green space tidy by grazing sustainable sheep and cattle.
Mmmmm… tasty! Nothing like a leg of lamb or a nice rib roast. Gotta keep the lawn maintenance crew level by eating the excess.
I kind of like that part of the plan, though I’m not keen on dodging the cow plops when I go for a little bit of pickup ball in the park.
.
.
.
From the article: “People are trying out new types of living arrangements with more shared functions and spaces. This means that more people can afford to live in cities.”
Only one problem. That’s a big unsupported assumption that people want to be herded into cities.
Most people don’t want to live in cities. I know, because I moved out to a rural area just beyond the housing developments of the burbs. The population of our township has more than quadrupled in the 20 years we’ve been here and all of the farmland that surrounded us is now owned by developers. They are leasing it to farmers as they, one-by-one, run services to a plot and then fill it with single family housing.
Most of the houses being built are 3,000 to 5,000 square feet and they are going up like mushrooms. Existing houses in the area sell in days of listing or even before they are listed. They don’t want 900-1,200 square feet apartments. Most of the houses are built on fractional acreage, a full acre, or more. People like a little elbow room. These people can well afford to live in cities. They choose not to.
So for that quoted bit to come true, people will have to be rounded up at gunpoint and herded into those high density utopias. They are currently voting their preference with their wallet, and they are not voting for shoulder-to-shoulder-nose-to-butt-feet-over-head high density housing.
That said, they are using a bit of recycled materials in this new construction, not by law but because it works out.
Climate crisis: 11,000 scientists warned of untold suffering – Greta’s dream.
scientists >>> NOT
11,000 scientists including Prof Mick Mouse and Prof Donald Duck 🙂
Talk about shoot yourself in the foot that got more publicity because of the humur than the whole announcement itself.
Ida Auken’s visions are not in line with the communist Russia, no no, you have to go back to the Zar rule to find something as awful as the reality of her suggestions.
However, politicians in Denmark can get away with anything. Sometimes there comes a brand new politician in the government with realistic and sensible philosophy, but after one or two months in parliament, he or she is conforming to the accepted norm. I remember one politician they could not brainwash, Mogens Glistrup. The parliament got so angry with him, not least because his party became the third largest, that they got the tax authorities to run a lawsuit against him. It was suggested that he owed $500,000 to the state and was jailed for a few years. The $500,000 was probably 1% of the value of his lawyer office, thus the jailing was purely political. It’s much the same as the democrats now trying to start impeachment President Trump for something pathetic, he most likely have not done.
I told you the above because it is the same uniformity Politburo we see in most “civilized” western countries. Denmark is further down this road than most other. Denmark earns a lot of money on the industrial climate complex and has been able to home grow wind turbines to the extreme, because they can relay on nuclear and hydro from Sweden and Norway to sustain their wet dreams.